emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: MAINTAINERS file and .el files?


From: Richard Stallman
Subject: Re: MAINTAINERS file and .el files?
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 17:27:46 -0700 (MST)

    do we need .el files listed in MAINTAINERS? We do have this information in
    .el files in Author: or Maintainer:, so I think it is useless/duplicated or
    Lisp part of this file should be autogenerated.

I agree--we may as well use Maintainer headers for the Lisp files.

    AFAIU, Stefan wanted only those files to be listed whose Maintainer 
    headers says "FSF".

In those cases, maybe the new maintainer should put his name in the
Maintainer header.  Since for these files we do already have the
Maintainer keyword convention, we may as well use that, rather than
adding another.

    Maybe we should invent similar conventions we use for .el files for .c
    files and autogenerate this file completely. What do you think?

I think it is fine to use MAINTAINERS for that.  It's easier than any
other method.


But don't be too rigid about consulting maintainers.

    How should I proceed e.g. if I'd like to commit this:

    --- hexl.el.~1.69.~ Tue Nov 20 07:50:19 2001
    +++ hexl.el Sun Nov 25 13:31:17 2001
    @@ -254,7 +254,6 @@
         (setq require-final-newline nil)

         ;; Add hooks to rehexlify or dehexlify on various events.
    -    (make-local-hook 'after-revert-hook)

You should just do it.  After all, you know that is a change we want
to make globally.  If you volunteer to do it here, that is useful;
there's no need to consult with anyone.

In general, there is no need to consult the maintainer of some part of
Emacs before making changes like this, or making obvious bug fixes.
We do want to have a way to *show* them these changes, but there is no
need to ask first.




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]